zimbabwe: have food security

Related concepts

Parents	nation Weight: 0.63 , country Weight: 0.62 , place Weight: 0.59 , state Weight: 0.52 , united states Weight: 0.52
Siblings	zambia Weight: 0.36 , central african republic Weight: 0.36 , malta Weight: 0.35 , nigeria Weight: 0.35 , ethiopia Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property	Similarity
have food security	1.00
have food insecurity	0.80
is food insecure	0.79

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.18

¬ Remarkable(zambia, is food insecure)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.23

¬ Remarkable(ethiopia, is food insecure)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.28

¬ Remarkable(zambia, have food insecurity)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(ethiopia, have food insecurity)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.61

¬ Remarkable(ethiopia, have food security)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.61

Remarkable(ethiopia, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.32

¬ Plausible(ethiopia, have food security)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.23

Remarkable(ethiopia, is food insecure) ⋁

Evidence: 0.10

¬ Plausible(ethiopia, is food insecure)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.18

Remarkable(zambia, is food insecure) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Plausible(zambia, is food insecure)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.28

Remarkable(zambia, have food insecurity) ⋁

Evidence: 0.37

¬ Plausible(zambia, have food insecurity)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

Remarkable(ethiopia, have food insecurity) ⋁

Evidence: 0.38

¬ Plausible(ethiopia, have food insecurity)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.76

¬ Salient(zimbabwe, have food security)

Similarity expansion

0.62

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.76

Salient(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.32

¬ Salient(zimbabwe, is food insecure)

0.60

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.38

¬ Plausible(zimbabwe, is food insecure)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.77

Typical(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Typical(zimbabwe, is food insecure)

0.57

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, is food insecure)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.76

Salient(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Salient(zimbabwe, have food insecurity)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.77

Typical(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Typical(zimbabwe, have food insecurity)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.57

Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food insecurity)

0.53

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Plausible(zimbabwe, have food insecurity)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.76

Salient(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Typical(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Typical(zimbabwe, have food security)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.30

¬ Typical(ethiopia, have food security)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.20

¬ Typical(ethiopia, is food insecure)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Typical(zambia, is food insecure)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Typical(zambia, have food insecurity)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(zimbabwe, have food security) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Typical(ethiopia, have food insecurity)